You have assembled a biased set of numbers which grossly misrepresent the total percentages and the numbers are inheirently wrong. Why don't you get your figure correct before you propose another rule. Why don't you update your study to years 2000-2007? the GA fleet has been reduced by significant numbers yet you seem to ignore this fact as well as many other facts. Why don't you come up with a viable alternative fuel? Bad science all the way around and just another example of government taxation and misrepresentation of the paying public. Update your study and your numbers and then give us some facts.
Anonymous public comment
This is comment on Proposed Rule
Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Lead Emissions from Piston-Engine Aircraft Using Leaded Aviation Gasoline
View Comment
Related Comments
View AllPublic Submission Posted: 04/29/2010 ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0294-0204
Aug 27,2010 11:59 PM ET
Public Submission Posted: 04/30/2010 ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0294-0205
Aug 27,2010 11:59 PM ET
Public Submission Posted: 04/30/2010 ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0294-0206
Aug 27,2010 11:59 PM ET
Public Submission Posted: 05/03/2010 ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0294-0208
Aug 27,2010 11:59 PM ET
Public Submission Posted: 05/05/2010 ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0294-0210
Aug 27,2010 11:59 PM ET